Gauhati High Court
Nirmal Biswakarma vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 27 May, 2025
Author: Nelson Sailo
Bench: Nelson Sailo
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010236192024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3509/2024
NIRMAL BISWAKARMA
S/O DHANBAHADUR BISWAKARMA, A RESIDENT OF JUGISUTI NEPALI
GAON, KAJUA NEPALI N.C, PO JUGISUTI, PS DHAKUAKHANA, DIST
LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM 787055
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR GUWAHATI
781006
2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI 19
3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
LAKHIMPUR DISTRICT CIRCLE
NORTH LAKHIMPUR
LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
4:THE HEADMASTER OF JUGISUTI TRIBAL KONENG HIGH SCHOOL
PO JUGUSUTI
DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787055
5:JITUMONI KUMAL
D/O SANGKAMAN KUMAL. VILLAGE KATALGURI
PO NEMUTENGANI
Page No.# 2/4
787055 DIST LAKHIMPUR
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, A TALUKDAR,MR A HOSSAIN,MR G G
GOGOI
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., MR. N K KALITA (R-5)
Linked Case :
NIRMAL BISWAKARMA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
------------
Advocate for : MR. J I BORBHUIYA
Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER
27.05.2025
Heard Mr. J I Bhorbhuiya, learned counsel for the, who submits that by
filing this application, the applicant seeks condonation of 363 days delay in filing
the connected review petition. Referring to the application, more particularly,
Page No.# 3/4
paragraph No. 3 of the application, the learned counsel submits that the
petitioner was not aware about the disposal of the writ petition, since he was
neither informed by his counsel nor by the authority concerned. It was only on
28.09.2024 that the petitioner came to know about the order passed by this
Court. The applicant, therefore consulted his present lawyer who advised him to
collect the required documents. While applying for a certified copy of the
Judgment dated 09.10.2023, the applicant also filed an FIR before
Dhakuakhana Police Station on 21.10.2024 against his earlier engaged counsel
due to manipulation and mis-representation committed by the said counsel.
[2.] The learned counsel submits that due to the fault of his appointed counsel
the applicant may not be made to suffer. In this connection, the learned counsel
has placed reliance upon the case of Radha Krishma Rai vs. Allahabad Bank &
Ors., reported in (2000) 9 SCC 733, which was relied upon by the Madras High
Court in C.R.P (NPD) No. 1053/2004 (Masilamani Naicker vs. Panchalai Ammal)
which was disposed of vide Order dated 15.02.2008 condoning the delay
however by imposing cost. The learned counsel submits that in the present case
also, since there was some default on the part of the appointed counsel, the
delay in filing the connected review petition may be condoned.
[3.] Mr. T Thakuria, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education
Page No.# 4/4
Department submits that he has no objection if the delay is condoned.
[4.] Considering the submissions made and upon perusal of the applications
and the authorities relied upon, this Court is inclined to allow the application.
Accordingly, the delay of 363 days in filing the connected review petition stands
condoned.
[5.] I.A stands disposed of as allowed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
